News

Developers’ cash never been spent

TENS of thousands of pounds paid by developers as long ago as the 1990s to help fund projects such as road improvements in York has never been spent.

A Freedom of Information request has revealed that City of York Council is still holding £20,000 of a Section 106 planning payment made in connection with the designer outlet development at Fulford in 1997/98.

Another £50,000 paid in 1999/2000 by the developers of the Travelodge hotel site in Piccadilly is unspent, as is almost £40,000 paid in 2000/01 at the Northminster Business Park at Upper Poppleton.

A further £25,000, paid in 2005/06 in connection with the construction of the Quality Inn, now Hotel 53, in Piccadilly has also never been spent.

Hotel owner Michael Hammill said the money had been intended for road improvements that never took place, and he had now written to the council to ask for the money back. He had been told officers werte looking into the matter.

Quantity surveyor Paul Cordock said he submitted the FOI request after someone else’s previous application had revealed that out of more than £3.2 million received by York through Section 106 agreements between 2008 and 2013, about £2.7 million was unspent.

He said he felt the council had a moral if not a legal obligation to let developers know it still had unspent money after more than five years and hand it back.

The Press asked the council whether it was entitled to keep such payments beyond five, ten or even 15 years, and whether it was legally or morally obliged to inform developers it still had such money and offer it back.

Mike Slater, assistant director of city and environmental services, said the sole purpose of Section 106 money was to invest it back into the community and infrastructure, so the additional demand created by, say, a new housing development, could be coped with.

“Any ‘unspent’ money can legitimately be held for a number of years as per the legal agreement,” he said.

“This allows money to be invested meaningfully into suitable schemes or projects which may require several years to establish.”

He said each development was dealt with on a case-bycase basis and sometimes, due to powers outside the council’s control, including the economic downturn or specific development delays, some 106 investments did not happen immediately.

“In some cases it may be several years before the contributions reach a level to allow the measures to be implemented, or the measures are actually required road junction upgrade required after a certain amount of development has taken place.”

He said most agreements had claw back clauses so that if the money was not utilised, it was “retrievable” by the applicant.

As yorkandproud has rightly observed, Mike Slater has not answered the question that the Press asked, and instead just waffled.

His answer is reminiscent of a politicians reply to a question that they cannot or do not want to answer for fear of being, as yorkandproud puts it, 'banged to rights'. Perhaps he has been told what to say by the two council leaders ? It won't be the first time, as a council whistleblower said that the planning report for MX2 was edited by the leaders with Mr Slater being forced to put his name to it !

This is the second time in days that Mike Slater has got egg on his face, as Saturday's Press reported how the council had lost its legal challenge against the NIL affordable housing on the Grain Store site, and had to pay the Government's legal costs of £8,648.

The standard clause in most S106 agreements requires the council to refund any unspent monies after five years, providing the payer with an account plus interest. In many cases it has clearly failed to do this, and has held onto the monies for years longer than it should have.

This is a very serious failure, and one that if a benefit cheat had done the same thing would have resulted in a custodial sentence. The officers responsible for this should be held to account, and apologies given to each and every developer who has been deprived of cash they should have been given back years ago !

As yorkandproud has rightly observed, Mike Slater has not answered the question that the Press asked, and instead just waffled.
His answer is reminiscent of a politicians reply to a question that they cannot or do not want to answer for fear of being, as yorkandproud puts it, 'banged to rights'. Perhaps he has been told what to say by the two council leaders ? It won't be the first time, as a council whistleblower said that the planning report for MX2 was edited by the leaders with Mr Slater being forced to put his name to it !
This is the second time in days that Mike Slater has got egg on his face, as Saturday's Press reported how the council had lost its legal challenge against the NIL affordable housing on the Grain Store site, and had to pay the Government's legal costs of £8,648.
The standard clause in most S106 agreements requires the council to refund any unspent monies after five years, providing the payer with an account plus interest. In many cases it has clearly failed to do this, and has held onto the monies for years longer than it should have.
This is a very serious failure, and one that if a benefit cheat had done the same thing would have resulted in a custodial sentence. The officers responsible for this should be held to account, and apologies given to each and every developer who has been deprived of cash they should have been given back years ago !Rocking Horse

I look forward to the Press reporting on how much money has been returned, and to which developers.

No doubt Mr Cordock will submit a follow up FOI request asking for this information in a few months time ?!!!

I look forward to the Press reporting on how much money has been returned, and to which developers.
No doubt Mr Cordock will submit a follow up FOI request asking for this information in a few months time ?!!!Rocking Horse

According to the Council's reply, the largest sum unspent was for the Barbican Centre (plus Kent Street Car Park) trwo amounts totalling almost £293,000

Mr Cordock also points out to the Council in an Internal Review request, that there is a discrepancy between the unspent monies given in response to the FOI by the BBC (only 42 days earlier than his FOI), and the reply to his.

The earlier amount was £1,455,430.00 and the later £1,145,643.76 - a difference of 3309,786.24 in 42 days ! Put into context, in the last five years the council only spent a total of £460,084 of all S106 monies, which is an average of only £92,000/yr. How could they spend in one month what they would normally take over three years to spend ? Yet more dodgy dealings and accounting ?

I have just found the FOI request on the 'What Do They Know' website.
Here is the link...
https://www.whatdoth
eyknow.com/request/s
ection_106_agreement
_monies_rec#incoming
-479879
According to the Council's reply, the largest sum unspent was for the Barbican Centre (plus Kent Street Car Park) trwo amounts totalling almost £293,000
Mr Cordock also points out to the Council in an Internal Review request, that there is a discrepancy between the unspent monies given in response to the FOI by the BBC (only 42 days earlier than his FOI), and the reply to his.
The earlier amount was £1,455,430.00 and the later £1,145,643.76 - a difference of 3309,786.24 in 42 days ! Put into context, in the last five years the council only spent a total of £460,084 of all S106 monies, which is an average of only £92,000/yr. How could they spend in one month what they would normally take over three years to spend ? Yet more dodgy dealings and accounting ?Rocking Horse

He said each development was dealt with on a case-bycase basis and sometimes, due to powers outside the council’s control, including the economic downturn or specific development delays, some 106 investments did not happen immediately...... quote from Mr Slater.......

Totally irrelevant and shows a misunderstanding of the system.... Most section 106's are written stating the money is earmarked for specific purposes ie bus stops/road improvements/traffic light improvements etc that are needed because of the development and will be spent on that purpose within a timeframe, normally 4 or 5 years. This is a legal document and IF not spent for whatever reason its refundable with interest and the Council should refund NOT make it difficult to get the money back which is NOT theirs if NOT spent.
what has happened in reality is that the money is just used to fund research or other ideas ie rail link to Haxby/new circulatory systems etc which will never happen but its a good way of Council not spending their rates monies! its been treated as a tax and now the cat is amongst the pigeons.
To be fair its not just CoYC doing this. What started as a legitimate way to make developers pay for the effects of their scheme has morphed into a general cash cow for example there is always a request for new public open space payments. There is never any new POS and the money goes to maintain existing POS which should be paid by the ratepayer. This is happening nationwide but is going to stop as all over the country developers have realised what is going on

He said each development was dealt with on a case-bycase basis and sometimes, due to powers outside the council’s control, including the economic downturn or specific development delays, some 106 investments did not happen immediately...... quote from Mr Slater.......
Totally irrelevant and shows a misunderstanding of the system.... Most section 106's are written stating the money is earmarked for specific purposes ie bus stops/road improvements/traffic light improvements etc that are needed because of the development and will be spent on that purpose within a timeframe, normally 4 or 5 years. This is a legal document and IF not spent for whatever reason its refundable with interest and the Council should refund NOT make it difficult to get the money back which is NOT theirs if NOT spent.
what has happened in reality is that the money is just used to fund research or other ideas ie rail link to Haxby/new circulatory systems etc which will never happen but its a good way of Council not spending their rates monies! its been treated as a tax and now the cat is amongst the pigeons.
To be fair its not just CoYC doing this. What started as a legitimate way to make developers pay for the effects of their scheme has morphed into a general cash cow for example there is always a request for new public open space payments. There is never any new POS and the money goes to maintain existing POS which should be paid by the ratepayer. This is happening nationwide but is going to stop as all over the country developers have realised what is going onmeme

Money from Designer Outlet was going to go to bus lanes in Fulford that proved politically sensitive - Labour lost the seat to Lib Dems anyway but the money has since sat waiting for Germany Beck changes to happen. Barbican money did go to Space 109 and Melbourne Centre but rest should have gone to upgrade on the pools. Perhaps its due to go into prop up the stadium plans now?

Money from Designer Outlet was going to go to bus lanes in Fulford that proved politically sensitive - Labour lost the seat to Lib Dems anyway but the money has since sat waiting for Germany Beck changes to happen. Barbican money did go to Space 109 and Melbourne Centre but rest should have gone to upgrade on the pools. Perhaps its due to go into prop up the stadium plans now?greenmonkey

greenmonkey wrote:
Money from Designer Outlet was going to go to bus lanes in Fulford that proved politically sensitive - Labour lost the seat to Lib Dems anyway but the money has since sat waiting for Germany Beck changes to happen. Barbican money did go to Space 109 and Melbourne Centre but rest should have gone to upgrade on the pools. Perhaps its due to go into prop up the stadium plans now?

You conveniently miss the point - the money has to be used within the time specified in the S106 (usually 5 years), if not IT HAS TO BE refunded to the payer !

It has nothing to do with political parties, or who controls which wards.
It is a point of principle; a contractural requirement, which the Council has an obligation to adhere to. No 'ifs' or 'buts', it's black and white. The money hasn't been spent, and should have been returned, but, it hasn't. The Council is in multiple breaches of contract, the unspent monies should be retyrned immediately, and those responsible for witholding the money should lose their jobs.

As a councillor, Greenmonkey, you really should not be making excuses or suggesting that the money is being used illegally.

[quote][p][bold]greenmonkey[/bold] wrote:
Money from Designer Outlet was going to go to bus lanes in Fulford that proved politically sensitive - Labour lost the seat to Lib Dems anyway but the money has since sat waiting for Germany Beck changes to happen. Barbican money did go to Space 109 and Melbourne Centre but rest should have gone to upgrade on the pools. Perhaps its due to go into prop up the stadium plans now?[/p][/quote]You conveniently miss the point - the money has to be used within the time specified in the S106 (usually 5 years), if not IT HAS TO BE refunded to the payer !
It has nothing to do with political parties, or who controls which wards.
It is a point of principle; a contractural requirement, which the Council has an obligation to adhere to. No 'ifs' or 'buts', it's black and white. The money hasn't been spent, and should have been returned, but, it hasn't. The Council is in multiple breaches of contract, the unspent monies should be retyrned immediately, and those responsible for witholding the money should lose their jobs.
As a councillor, Greenmonkey, you really should not be making excuses or suggesting that the money is being used illegally.Rocking Horse

Hacker usually starts after he gets home from the council, after tea time.

For record purposes.
Current pre-hacked scores, are as follows:-
+11, -24, +16, +13, +6, +4, +5, +3, +3, +2, 0, & +1
Hacker usually starts after he gets home from the council, after tea time.Rocking Horse

Hacker usually starts after he gets home from the council, after tea time.

Funny how you don't mention it when your scores are manipulated upwards. Here is a comment from you on a letter in last Thursday's Press.

Rocking Horse says...
The point is people are avoiding York, because of the destructive mismanagement by the marxist regime at the Council.

Get them OUT in 2015 !

Score: 5563

Other commentators who espouse similar views to yours were also manipulated upwards.

[quote][p][bold]Rocking Horse[/bold] wrote:
For record purposes.
Current pre-hacked scores, are as follows:-
+11, -24, +16, +13, +6, +4, +5, +3, +3, +2, 0, & +1
Hacker usually starts after he gets home from the council, after tea time.[/p][/quote]Funny how you don't mention it when your scores are manipulated upwards. Here is a comment from you on a letter in last Thursday's Press.
Rocking Horse says...
The point is people are avoiding York, because of the destructive mismanagement by the marxist regime at the Council.
Get them OUT in 2015 !
Score: 5563
Other commentators who espouse similar views to yours were also manipulated upwards.howehill exile

Rocking Horse wrote: For record purposes. Current pre-hacked scores, are as follows:- +11, -24, +16, +13, +6, +4, +5, +3, +3, +2, 0, &amp; +1 Hacker usually starts after he gets home from the council, after tea time.

Funny how you don't mention it when your scores are manipulated upwards. Here is a comment from you on a letter in last Thursday's Press. Rocking Horse says... The point is people are avoiding York, because of the destructive mismanagement by the marxist regime at the Council. Get them OUT in 2015 ! Score: 5563 Other commentators who espouse similar views to yours were also manipulated upwards.

Quite ridiculous ?!!!

Why would I comment on such a patently obvious hacked score, which had been done by the same hacker to give the illusion that people with our views would stoop to his/her pathetic levels.

Any legitimate scores in excess of +100 or lower than -100 are quite rare, and a score of +or-1,000's is unheard of, so obviously illegitimate.

The score hacker now varies the scores to look more plausible, but, it's obvious from the sentiments of the comments what the majority are against or in favour of, and that means if it is to do with the Council and it's Labour (and marxist) leaders, then the majority of York are agaibst them !

[quote][p][bold]howehill exile[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Rocking Horse[/bold] wrote: For record purposes. Current pre-hacked scores, are as follows:- +11, -24, +16, +13, +6, +4, +5, +3, +3, +2, 0, & +1 Hacker usually starts after he gets home from the council, after tea time.[/p][/quote]Funny how you don't mention it when your scores are manipulated upwards. Here is a comment from you on a letter in last Thursday's Press. Rocking Horse says... The point is people are avoiding York, because of the destructive mismanagement by the marxist regime at the Council. Get them OUT in 2015 ! Score: 5563 Other commentators who espouse similar views to yours were also manipulated upwards.[/p][/quote]Quite ridiculous ?!!!
Why would I comment on such a patently obvious hacked score, which had been done by the same hacker to give the illusion that people with our views would stoop to his/her pathetic levels.
Any legitimate scores in excess of +100 or lower than -100 are quite rare, and a score of +or-1,000's is unheard of, so obviously illegitimate.
The score hacker now varies the scores to look more plausible, but, it's obvious from the sentiments of the comments what the majority are against or in favour of, and that means if it is to do with the Council and it's Labour (and marxist) leaders, then the majority of York are agaibst them !Rocking Horse

Frankly, the scoring system is ridiculous in allowing such blatant manipulation.
What are your thoughts on who should replace the Labour Council in 2015 - I'm sure we'd all be interested to know.
I'm not impressed by many of the things they have done, so what is the alternative.

Frankly, the scoring system is ridiculous in allowing such blatant manipulation.
What are your thoughts on who should replace the Labour Council in 2015 - I'm sure we'd all be interested to know.
I'm not impressed by many of the things they have done, so what is the alternative.howehill exile

tonyfromitaly wrote:
Well done Mr Cordock. Its great to see a few council officers start squirming.
Start sharpening the claws, theres going to be a big clawback.

But....but that's you.....? Why are you talking about yourself in the third person? And how come you're on your fourth username, after Mr Crabtree, Scarlet Pimpernel and Rocking Horse? Does the term "paranoid schizophrenic" mean anything to you?

[quote][p][bold]tonyfromitaly[/bold] wrote:
Well done Mr Cordock. Its great to see a few council officers start squirming.
Start sharpening the claws, theres going to be a big clawback.[/p][/quote]But....but that's you.....? Why are you talking about yourself in the third person? And how come you're on your fourth username, after Mr Crabtree, Scarlet Pimpernel and Rocking Horse? Does the term "paranoid schizophrenic" mean anything to you?johnnyc68

You should come out of the closet, dude. Apparently anonymity is cowardly or something?

Till you do.... people say it's all rocking horse shiit

*rolling of eyes as big as to make eyes in back of head*
You should come out of the closet, dude. Apparently anonymity is cowardly or something?
Till you do.... people say it's all rocking horse shiitBuzzz Light-year

Mr Crabtree and Scarlett Pimpernel is back. I just about worked that one out on the 'Confusion over housing' posting of Rocking Horse. Not lost his touch though. Can still be as spiteful and not short of insults as back in the good old Monks Cross 2/York Stadium debate.

Mr Crabtree and Scarlett Pimpernel is back. I just about worked that one out on the 'Confusion over housing' posting of Rocking Horse. Not lost his touch though. Can still be as spiteful and not short of insults as back in the good old Monks Cross 2/York Stadium debate.bjb

Buzzz Light-year wrote:
*rolling of eyes as big as to make eyes in back of head*

You should come out of the closet, dude. Apparently anonymity is cowardly or something?

Till you do.... people say it's all rocking horse shiit

Buzz empty can, thought it was time we heard from you. Rattle on mate.

[quote][p][bold]Buzzz Light-year[/bold] wrote:
*rolling of eyes as big as to make eyes in back of head*
You should come out of the closet, dude. Apparently anonymity is cowardly or something?
Till you do.... people say it's all rocking horse shiit[/p][/quote]Buzz empty can, thought it was time we heard from you. Rattle on mate.tonyfromitaly

Well the wheels have well and truly come off now. Snaffling away the cash or bribe money s106 if you prefer. Straight after the grain site getting full Judgement over our glorious leader. At our expense I might add. I haven't had as much fun since Poulson and T Dan Smith got plastered over the tabloids.
The plot thickens. Well it would wouldn't it, we have a full cast of plotters taking wages that we pay for. The question is how much longer for ?.

Well the wheels have well and truly come off now. Snaffling away the cash or bribe money s106 if you prefer. Straight after the grain site getting full Judgement over our glorious leader. At our expense I might add. I haven't had as much fun since Poulson and T Dan Smith got plastered over the tabloids.
The plot thickens. Well it would wouldn't it, we have a full cast of plotters taking wages that we pay for. The question is how much longer for ?.tonyfromitaly

I see the Reich minister of propaganda has struck in double quick time with a minus 87 and a minus 88. You sad person you might think you are immune to reproach for your twisting and conniving but then so did Joseph Goebles.
I recall he had a date with the hangman in the end.

I see the Reich minister of propaganda has struck in double quick time with a minus 87 and a minus 88. You sad person you might think you are immune to reproach for your twisting and conniving but then so did Joseph Goebles.
I recall he had a date with the hangman in the end.tonyfromitaly

howehill exile wrote:
Frankly, the scoring system is ridiculous in allowing such blatant manipulation. What are your thoughts on who should replace the Labour Council in 2015 - I'm sure we'd all be interested to know. I'm not impressed by many of the things they have done, so what is the alternative.

I'd like to see more like Mark Warters. Not necessarily independent, but, councillors not afraid to expose the manipulation of process and cheating by officers.

Like the issue of this story. Where are the comments from councillors apologising for this ? Where are their comments criticising the officers responsible ?

A deafening silence......... !!!!

There is something very wrong with this council, where monies which should have been returned to the payers have not been. The reply from Michael Slater does not even answer the question by the press, "... whether it was legally or morally obliged to inform developers it still had such money and offer it back ?" He said it was "retrievable" which implies that the onus is on the payers, whereas contracturally and morally it is on the receiver to return it. A more honest answer would have been, "yes, it is refundable", followed by an assurrance that they will ensure that all unspent monies out of time, will now be returned to the payers with interest and apologies.

This story is not over, and we have a right to know what happens now this has been exposed.

Says it all, doesn't it.

[quote][p][bold]howehill exile[/bold] wrote:
Frankly, the scoring system is ridiculous in allowing such blatant manipulation. What are your thoughts on who should replace the Labour Council in 2015 - I'm sure we'd all be interested to know. I'm not impressed by many of the things they have done, so what is the alternative.[/p][/quote]I'd like to see more like Mark Warters. Not necessarily independent, but, councillors not afraid to expose the manipulation of process and cheating by officers.
Like the issue of this story. Where are the comments from councillors apologising for this ? Where are their comments criticising the officers responsible ?
A deafening silence......... !!!!
There is something very wrong with this council, where monies which should have been returned to the payers have not been. The reply from Michael Slater does not even answer the question by the press, "... whether it was legally or morally obliged to inform developers it still had such money and offer it back ?" He said it was "retrievable" which implies that the onus is on the payers, whereas contracturally and morally it is on the receiver to return it. A more honest answer would have been, "yes, it is refundable", followed by an assurrance that they will ensure that all unspent monies out of time, will now be returned to the payers with interest and apologies.
This story is not over, and we have a right to know what happens now this has been exposed.
Says it all, doesn't it.Rocking Horse

bjb wrote:
Mr Crabtree and Scarlett Pimpernel is back. I just about worked that one out on the 'Confusion over housing' posting of Rocking Horse. Not lost his touch though. Can still be as spiteful and not short of insults as back in the good old Monks Cross 2/York Stadium debate.

He tells the truth, unlike some on here, who instead of condemning the wrongful conduct of the council, attack those who do.

I'm not spiteful, I'm enraged at the blatant dishonesty and cheating by the council !

BTW, you missed two of my other identities, 'Duck in the Hedge' and 'Thorn in my Side' !

I'm here to stay mate, it will take more than you and the Labour/Council bully boys to scare me off.

[quote][p][bold]bjb[/bold] wrote:
Mr Crabtree and Scarlett Pimpernel is back. I just about worked that one out on the 'Confusion over housing' posting of Rocking Horse. Not lost his touch though. Can still be as spiteful and not short of insults as back in the good old Monks Cross 2/York Stadium debate.[/p][/quote]He tells the truth, unlike some on here, who instead of condemning the wrongful conduct of the council, attack those who do.
I'm not spiteful, I'm enraged at the blatant dishonesty and cheating by the council !
BTW, you missed two of my other identities, 'Duck in the Hedge' and 'Thorn in my Side' !
I'm here to stay mate, it will take more than you and the Labour/Council bully boys to scare me off.Rocking Horse

tonyfromitaly wrote: Well done Mr Cordock. Its great to see a few council officers start squirming. Start sharpening the claws, theres going to be a big clawback.

But....but that's you.....? Why are you talking about yourself in the third person? And how come you're on your fourth username, after Mr Crabtree, Scarlet Pimpernel and Rocking Horse? Does the term &quot;paranoid schizophrenic" mean anything to you?

No, he isn't me, I am !!!

Smear and call me what you like. It's a sign of YOUR fear and paranoia, not mine.

I know the truth, and they (you too) know it.

Yeah, I know it's a dirty job, but, I'm doing it. Tough sh*t if you don't like it !

[quote][p][bold]johnnyc68[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]tonyfromitaly[/bold] wrote: Well done Mr Cordock. Its great to see a few council officers start squirming. Start sharpening the claws, theres going to be a big clawback.[/p][/quote]But....but that's you.....? Why are you talking about yourself in the third person? And how come you're on your fourth username, after Mr Crabtree, Scarlet Pimpernel and Rocking Horse? Does the term "paranoid schizophrenic" mean anything to you?[/p][/quote]No, he isn't me, I am !!!
Smear and call me what you like. It's a sign of YOUR fear and paranoia, not mine.
I know the truth, and they (you too) know it.
Yeah, I know it's a dirty job, but, I'm doing it. Tough sh*t if you don't like it !Rocking Horse

Buzzz Light-year wrote:
*rolling of eyes as big as to make eyes in back of head* You should come out of the closet, dude. Apparently anonymity is cowardly or something? Till you do.... people say it's all rocking horse shiit

Who cares who exposes the Council's wrongdoing ?

The validity of the allegations is the important thing, and they are banged to rights with this one, but, the council's misguided defenders like you, ignore the facts, and instead try and deflect attention to who I am.

Its not about me - its about the Council witholding monies that they are not entitled to !

[quote][p][bold]Buzzz Light-year[/bold] wrote:
*rolling of eyes as big as to make eyes in back of head* You should come out of the closet, dude. Apparently anonymity is cowardly or something? Till you do.... people say it's all rocking horse shiit[/p][/quote]Who cares who exposes the Council's wrongdoing ?
The validity of the allegations is the important thing, and they are banged to rights with this one, but, the council's misguided defenders like you, ignore the facts, and instead try and deflect attention to who I am.
Its not about me - its about the Council witholding monies that they are not entitled to !Rocking Horse

Having read all the comments it amazes me how the original thread of a storey gets hijacked and turns into a slanging match by certain commenters who try to belittle those commenters that expose wrong doing by the present council.
The accusation that S106 monies are being held without good reason is in my opinion a serious matter and should not be defended by those who choose to affiliate themselves with the present council.

Having read all the comments it amazes me how the original thread of a storey gets hijacked and turns into a slanging match by certain commenters who try to belittle those commenters that expose wrong doing by the present council.
The accusation that S106 monies are being held without good reason is in my opinion a serious matter and should not be defended by those who choose to affiliate themselves with the present council.Igiveinthen

The over night negative scores achievements awards are as follows.
Gold = tonyfromitaly -148
Silver = Rocking Horse -58
Bronze = roadwars -44
Only one award per person, well done to all who took part.Scores On The Doors

I shall put it with my Fiat Service Medal......Cross spanners with oak leaves.

[quote][p][bold]Scores On The Doors[/bold] wrote:
The over night negative scores achievements awards are as follows.
Gold = tonyfromitaly -148
Silver = Rocking Horse -58
Bronze = roadwars -44
Only one award per person, well done to all who took part.[/p][/quote]I shall put it with my Fiat Service Medal......Cross spanners with oak leaves.tonyfromitaly

Scores On The Doors wrote:
The over night negative scores achievements awards are as follows. Gold = tonyfromitaly -148 Silver = Rocking Horse -58 Bronze = roadwars -44 Only one award per person, well done to all who took part.

Nice one!, I think we should all take these scores with a pinch of salt, sadly the pluss and minus scoring system no longer means anything and the press instead of ignoring it - OR PERHAPS THEY ARE IN COLUSION WITH IT? - should either remove it or devise another way of showing agreement or disagreement with a comment.

[quote][p][bold]Scores On The Doors[/bold] wrote:
The over night negative scores achievements awards are as follows. Gold = tonyfromitaly -148 Silver = Rocking Horse -58 Bronze = roadwars -44 Only one award per person, well done to all who took part.[/p][/quote]Nice one!, I think we should all take these scores with a pinch of salt, sadly the pluss and minus scoring system no longer means anything and the press instead of ignoring it - OR PERHAPS THEY ARE IN COLUSION WITH IT? - should either remove it or devise another way of showing agreement or disagreement with a comment.Igiveinthen

Scores On The Doors wrote: The over night negative scores achievements awards are as follows. Gold = tonyfromitaly -148 Silver = Rocking Horse -58 Bronze = roadwars -44 Only one award per person, well done to all who took part.

Nice one!, I think we should all take these scores with a pinch of salt, sadly the pluss and minus scoring system no longer means anything and the press instead of ignoring it - OR PERHAPS THEY ARE IN COLUSION WITH IT? - should either remove it or devise another way of showing agreement or disagreement with a comment.

The score hacker brings shame and disrepute to him/herself, the Council and Labour.

It makes them all look dodgy, dishonest, manipulative, cheating and despicable.

Keeping these unspent monies are clear breaches of the refunding clause of S106 agreements. These are not acts of forgetfulness or incompetence, they are willful acts of criminality. The matter should be viewed and dealt with accordingly, by legal action.

[quote][p][bold]Igiveinthen[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Scores On The Doors[/bold] wrote: The over night negative scores achievements awards are as follows. Gold = tonyfromitaly -148 Silver = Rocking Horse -58 Bronze = roadwars -44 Only one award per person, well done to all who took part.[/p][/quote]Nice one!, I think we should all take these scores with a pinch of salt, sadly the pluss and minus scoring system no longer means anything and the press instead of ignoring it - OR PERHAPS THEY ARE IN COLUSION WITH IT? - should either remove it or devise another way of showing agreement or disagreement with a comment.[/p][/quote]The score hacker brings shame and disrepute to him/herself, the Council and Labour.
It makes them all look dodgy, dishonest, manipulative, cheating and despicable.
Keeping these unspent monies are clear breaches of the refunding clause of S106 agreements. These are not acts of forgetfulness or incompetence, they are willful acts of criminality. The matter should be viewed and dealt with accordingly, by legal action.Rocking Horse

Seems to me that there must be a recourse as in the miss selling debacle by the banks. All those builders who were charged (Robbed) should have recompense and also those builders who were forced to give away dwellings should also be repaid.

Seems to me that there must be a recourse as in the miss selling debacle by the banks. All those builders who were charged (Robbed) should have recompense and also those builders who were forced to give away dwellings should also be repaid.tonyfromitaly

bjb wrote:
Mr Crabtree and Scarlett Pimpernel is back. I just about worked that one out on the 'Confusion over housing' posting of Rocking Horse. Not lost his touch though. Can still be as spiteful and not short of insults as back in the good old Monks Cross 2/York Stadium debate.

He tells the truth, unlike some on here, who instead of condemning the wrongful conduct of the council, attack those who do.

I'm not spiteful, I'm enraged at the blatant dishonesty and cheating by the council !

BTW, you missed two of my other identities, 'Duck in the Hedge' and 'Thorn in my Side' !

I'm here to stay mate, it will take more than you and the Labour/Council bully boys to scare me off.

You seem proud of all your different names.
Why have you needed to register so many names?
Oh yes, because you're always getting banned.
You proud of being banned?
Why do you get banned so much?
Because you are nasty, arrogant and offensive, you drop false accusations like postmen drop elastic bands and the word "sorry" isn't in your lexicon.
People like you (who give it but can't take it, and refuse to show contrition despite a crowd of witnesses telling them they are wrong) are the reason for society's biggest modern day ill.
I meet people like you every day and they disgust me, they seem less than human - it's humility that gives us our humanity and you have none.
I'm glad I don't know you personally, I know who you are and I seriously wonder about those around you.

Said it before, you're a bad advert for your cause.

[quote][p][bold]Rocking Horse[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]bjb[/bold] wrote:
Mr Crabtree and Scarlett Pimpernel is back. I just about worked that one out on the 'Confusion over housing' posting of Rocking Horse. Not lost his touch though. Can still be as spiteful and not short of insults as back in the good old Monks Cross 2/York Stadium debate.[/p][/quote]He tells the truth, unlike some on here, who instead of condemning the wrongful conduct of the council, attack those who do.
I'm not spiteful, I'm enraged at the blatant dishonesty and cheating by the council !
BTW, you missed two of my other identities, 'Duck in the Hedge' and 'Thorn in my Side' !
I'm here to stay mate, it will take more than you and the Labour/Council bully boys to scare me off.[/p][/quote]You seem proud of all your different names.
Why have you needed to register so many names?
Oh yes, because you're always getting banned.
You proud of being banned?
Why do you get banned so much?
Because you are nasty, arrogant and offensive, you drop false accusations like postmen drop elastic bands and the word "sorry" isn't in your lexicon.
People like you (who give it but can't take it, and refuse to show contrition despite a crowd of witnesses telling them they are wrong) are the reason for society's biggest modern day ill.
I meet people like you every day and they disgust me, they seem less than human - it's humility that gives us our humanity and you have none.
I'm glad I don't know you personally, I know who you are and I seriously wonder about those around you.
Said it before, you're a bad advert for your cause.Buzzz Light-year

Spot on Buzz. I seem to remember, even the council blocked his email address as a result of his unprovoked venomous attacks on individuals.

McCarthyism is the practice of making accusations of disloyalty, subversion, or treason without proper regard for evidence.

During the McCarthy era in the USA, thousands of Americans were accused of being communists or communist sympathizers and became the subject of aggressive investigations and questioning before government or private-industry panels, committees and agencies. The primary targets of such suspicions were government employees, those in the entertainment industry, educators and union activists.

It would be a bad day for our democracy to ever come close to this situation where people became obsessive looking for 'Red Under the Bed'.

Spot on Buzz. I seem to remember, even the council blocked his email address as a result of his unprovoked venomous attacks on individuals.
McCarthyism is the practice of making accusations of disloyalty, subversion, or treason without proper regard for evidence.
During the McCarthy era in the USA, thousands of Americans were accused of being communists or communist sympathizers and became the subject of aggressive investigations and questioning before government or private-industry panels, committees and agencies. The primary targets of such suspicions were government employees, those in the entertainment industry, educators and union activists.
It would be a bad day for our democracy to ever come close to this situation where people became obsessive looking for 'Red Under the Bed'.bjb

bjb wrote: Mr Crabtree and Scarlett Pimpernel is back. I just about worked that one out on the 'Confusion over housing' posting of Rocking Horse. Not lost his touch though. Can still be as spiteful and not short of insults as back in the good old Monks Cross 2/York Stadium debate.

He tells the truth, unlike some on here, who instead of condemning the wrongful conduct of the council, attack those who do. I'm not spiteful, I'm enraged at the blatant dishonesty and cheating by the council ! BTW, you missed two of my other identities, 'Duck in the Hedge' and 'Thorn in my Side' ! I'm here to stay mate, it will take more than you and the Labour/Council bully boys to scare me off.

You seem proud of all your different names. Why have you needed to register so many names? Oh yes, because you're always getting banned. You proud of being banned? Why do you get banned so much? Because you are nasty, arrogant and offensive, you drop false accusations like postmen drop elastic bands and the word &quot;sorry" isn't in your lexicon. People like you (who give it but can't take it, and refuse to show contrition despite a crowd of witnesses telling them they are wrong) are the reason for society's biggest modern day ill. I meet people like you every day and they disgust me, they seem less than human - it's humility that gives us our humanity and you have none. I'm glad I don't know you personally, I know who you are and I seriously wonder about those around you. Said it before, you're a bad advert for your cause.

Pot calling the kettle black, I'm afraid. You have been banned, so you know the score.

I'm proud that I speak my mind, tell the truth, and expose the persistent wrongdoing by the council.

The feelings mutual, by the way.

[quote][p][bold]Buzzz Light-year[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Rocking Horse[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bjb[/bold] wrote: Mr Crabtree and Scarlett Pimpernel is back. I just about worked that one out on the 'Confusion over housing' posting of Rocking Horse. Not lost his touch though. Can still be as spiteful and not short of insults as back in the good old Monks Cross 2/York Stadium debate.[/p][/quote]He tells the truth, unlike some on here, who instead of condemning the wrongful conduct of the council, attack those who do. I'm not spiteful, I'm enraged at the blatant dishonesty and cheating by the council ! BTW, you missed two of my other identities, 'Duck in the Hedge' and 'Thorn in my Side' ! I'm here to stay mate, it will take more than you and the Labour/Council bully boys to scare me off.[/p][/quote]You seem proud of all your different names. Why have you needed to register so many names? Oh yes, because you're always getting banned. You proud of being banned? Why do you get banned so much? Because you are nasty, arrogant and offensive, you drop false accusations like postmen drop elastic bands and the word "sorry" isn't in your lexicon. People like you (who give it but can't take it, and refuse to show contrition despite a crowd of witnesses telling them they are wrong) are the reason for society's biggest modern day ill. I meet people like you every day and they disgust me, they seem less than human - it's humility that gives us our humanity and you have none. I'm glad I don't know you personally, I know who you are and I seriously wonder about those around you. Said it before, you're a bad advert for your cause.[/p][/quote]Pot calling the kettle black, I'm afraid. You have been banned, so you know the score.
I'm proud that I speak my mind, tell the truth, and expose the persistent wrongdoing by the council.
The feelings mutual, by the way.Rocking Horse

bjb wrote:
Spot on Buzz. I seem to remember, even the council blocked his email address as a result of his unprovoked venomous attacks on individuals. McCarthyism is the practice of making accusations of disloyalty, subversion, or treason without proper regard for evidence. During the McCarthy era in the USA, thousands of Americans were accused of being communists or communist sympathizers and became the subject of aggressive investigations and questioning before government or private-industry panels, committees and agencies. The primary targets of such suspicions were government employees, those in the entertainment industry, educators and union activists. It would be a bad day for our democracy to ever come close to this situation where people became obsessive looking for 'Red Under the Bed'.

They are not 'reds under the beds' though. They are open about it.

NESTA's Chief Executive, Geoff Mulgan is a known marxist, who openly condemns capitalism, and calls it, 'cruel', 'violent', 'war-like', 'predatory' and 'destructive'. This so called 'charity' has a sinister agenda, and spends most of it's time on egging on Local Authorities with it's thinly-veiled initiatives such as 'creative councils', which are deeply marxian.

Kersten England is a trustee of NESTA, and speaks regularly at their shindigs around the country, and she makes no secret of her admiration for marxist academics and intellectuals on twitter.

Common Purpose is another so called 'charity' founded and run by known marxist Julia Middleton, and Ms England is on the regional advisory panel. This secretive organisation which works under Chatham House rules, is elitist and seeks to 'lead beyond authority'. It is deeply sinister and uses NLP (neuro linguistic programming) techniques (brainwashing) in it's leadership training courses, to re-engineer it's graduates views on society.

All very nasty stuff !

[quote][p][bold]bjb[/bold] wrote:
Spot on Buzz. I seem to remember, even the council blocked his email address as a result of his unprovoked venomous attacks on individuals. McCarthyism is the practice of making accusations of disloyalty, subversion, or treason without proper regard for evidence. During the McCarthy era in the USA, thousands of Americans were accused of being communists or communist sympathizers and became the subject of aggressive investigations and questioning before government or private-industry panels, committees and agencies. The primary targets of such suspicions were government employees, those in the entertainment industry, educators and union activists. It would be a bad day for our democracy to ever come close to this situation where people became obsessive looking for 'Red Under the Bed'.[/p][/quote]They are not 'reds under the beds' though. They are open about it.
NESTA's Chief Executive, Geoff Mulgan is a known marxist, who openly condemns capitalism, and calls it, 'cruel', 'violent', 'war-like', 'predatory' and 'destructive'. This so called 'charity' has a sinister agenda, and spends most of it's time on egging on Local Authorities with it's thinly-veiled initiatives such as 'creative councils', which are deeply marxian.
Kersten England is a trustee of NESTA, and speaks regularly at their shindigs around the country, and she makes no secret of her admiration for marxist academics and intellectuals on twitter.
Common Purpose is another so called 'charity' founded and run by known marxist Julia Middleton, and Ms England is on the regional advisory panel. This secretive organisation which works under Chatham House rules, is elitist and seeks to 'lead beyond authority'. It is deeply sinister and uses NLP (neuro linguistic programming) techniques (brainwashing) in it's leadership training courses, to re-engineer it's graduates views on society.
All very nasty stuff !Rocking Horse

Magicman! wrote:
Maybe the council are just saving and investing the money so they can get enough together to dual the A1237....

It is not their money.

The S106 agreements are clear, any unspent monies after 5 years have to be refunded.

Holding onto the cash is illegal, and the council are behaving in a criminal fashion.

This story has more to come.....

[quote][p][bold]Magicman![/bold] wrote:
Maybe the council are just saving and investing the money so they can get enough together to dual the A1237....[/p][/quote]It is not their money.
The S106 agreements are clear, any unspent monies after 5 years have to be refunded.
Holding onto the cash is illegal, and the council are behaving in a criminal fashion.
This story has more to come.....Rocking Horse

bjb wrote:
Spot on Buzz. I seem to remember, even the council blocked his email address as a result of his unprovoked venomous attacks on individuals.

McCarthyism is the practice of making accusations of disloyalty, subversion, or treason without proper regard for evidence.

During the McCarthy era in the USA, thousands of Americans were accused of being communists or communist sympathizers and became the subject of aggressive investigations and questioning before government or private-industry panels, committees and agencies. The primary targets of such suspicions were government employees, those in the entertainment industry, educators and union activists.

It would be a bad day for our democracy to ever come close to this situation where people became obsessive looking for 'Red Under the Bed'.

Yes, McCarthyism is good way of describing some of his behaviour.
Apparently I'm the Score Hacker. Oh no I'm not it's you bjb. Wait, it's Buda. No, Jonthan. And The Press are cahoots with it! And everything.

Good observation.

[quote][p][bold]bjb[/bold] wrote:
Spot on Buzz. I seem to remember, even the council blocked his email address as a result of his unprovoked venomous attacks on individuals.
McCarthyism is the practice of making accusations of disloyalty, subversion, or treason without proper regard for evidence.
During the McCarthy era in the USA, thousands of Americans were accused of being communists or communist sympathizers and became the subject of aggressive investigations and questioning before government or private-industry panels, committees and agencies. The primary targets of such suspicions were government employees, those in the entertainment industry, educators and union activists.
It would be a bad day for our democracy to ever come close to this situation where people became obsessive looking for 'Red Under the Bed'.[/p][/quote]Yes, McCarthyism is good way of describing some of his behaviour.
Apparently I'm the Score Hacker. Oh no I'm not it's you bjb. Wait, it's Buda. No, Jonthan. And The Press are cahoots with it! And everything.
Good observation.Buzzz Light-year

bjb wrote: Mr Crabtree and Scarlett Pimpernel is back. I just about worked that one out on the 'Confusion over housing' posting of Rocking Horse. Not lost his touch though. Can still be as spiteful and not short of insults as back in the good old Monks Cross 2/York Stadium debate.

He tells the truth, unlike some on here, who instead of condemning the wrongful conduct of the council, attack those who do. I'm not spiteful, I'm enraged at the blatant dishonesty and cheating by the council ! BTW, you missed two of my other identities, 'Duck in the Hedge' and 'Thorn in my Side' ! I'm here to stay mate, it will take more than you and the Labour/Council bully boys to scare me off.

You seem proud of all your different names. Why have you needed to register so many names? Oh yes, because you're always getting banned. You proud of being banned? Why do you get banned so much? Because you are nasty, arrogant and offensive, you drop false accusations like postmen drop elastic bands and the word &quot;sorry" isn't in your lexicon. People like you (who give it but can't take it, and refuse to show contrition despite a crowd of witnesses telling them they are wrong) are the reason for society's biggest modern day ill. I meet people like you every day and they disgust me, they seem less than human - it's humility that gives us our humanity and you have none. I'm glad I don't know you personally, I know who you are and I seriously wonder about those around you. Said it before, you're a bad advert for your cause.

Pot calling the kettle black, I'm afraid. You have been banned, so you know the score.

I'm proud that I speak my mind, tell the truth, and expose the persistent wrongdoing by the council.

The feelings mutual, by the way.

Don't know how you can say pot kettle black. I'm not even in the same ballpark as you. Not by a long, long stretch.

[quote][p][bold]Rocking Horse[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Buzzz Light-year[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Rocking Horse[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bjb[/bold] wrote: Mr Crabtree and Scarlett Pimpernel is back. I just about worked that one out on the 'Confusion over housing' posting of Rocking Horse. Not lost his touch though. Can still be as spiteful and not short of insults as back in the good old Monks Cross 2/York Stadium debate.[/p][/quote]He tells the truth, unlike some on here, who instead of condemning the wrongful conduct of the council, attack those who do. I'm not spiteful, I'm enraged at the blatant dishonesty and cheating by the council ! BTW, you missed two of my other identities, 'Duck in the Hedge' and 'Thorn in my Side' ! I'm here to stay mate, it will take more than you and the Labour/Council bully boys to scare me off.[/p][/quote]You seem proud of all your different names. Why have you needed to register so many names? Oh yes, because you're always getting banned. You proud of being banned? Why do you get banned so much? Because you are nasty, arrogant and offensive, you drop false accusations like postmen drop elastic bands and the word "sorry" isn't in your lexicon. People like you (who give it but can't take it, and refuse to show contrition despite a crowd of witnesses telling them they are wrong) are the reason for society's biggest modern day ill. I meet people like you every day and they disgust me, they seem less than human - it's humility that gives us our humanity and you have none. I'm glad I don't know you personally, I know who you are and I seriously wonder about those around you. Said it before, you're a bad advert for your cause.[/p][/quote]Pot calling the kettle black, I'm afraid. You have been banned, so you know the score.
I'm proud that I speak my mind, tell the truth, and expose the persistent wrongdoing by the council.
The feelings mutual, by the way.[/p][/quote]Don't know how you can say pot kettle black. I'm not even in the same ballpark as you. Not by a long, long stretch.Buzzz Light-year

She is a guest speaker today at the West Midlands Employers Conference at Villa Park, Birmingham. According to the flyer by this organisation who provide leadership and people solutions to the public sector, Kersten is speaking on the following:-

“The positive and real impact of organisational development and employee engagement”

Well one of the impacts of York Council's organisational developments under her watch is to withold cash that should be returned to the payer if not spent - how positive is that ?

As for employee engagement, how many staff knew that she was on yet another public speaking event in the council's time ?

Here we are with job cuts and less having to do more, and the head honcho is leading by example, telling others how it should be done, and neglecting her own job 1

Like Alexander, Ms England is doing this not for York's benefit, she's doing it for her own self-serving political and career ends. Networking for her next job opportunity, which won't be long. She'll be gone before the 2015 election but might just delat her 'Grand Depart' till after the bike race, when even more of our money will be wasted !

Kersten England is on another away day it seems !
She is a guest speaker today at the West Midlands Employers Conference at Villa Park, Birmingham. According to the flyer by this organisation who provide leadership and people solutions to the public sector, Kersten is speaking on the following:-
“The positive and real impact of organisational development and employee engagement”
Well one of the impacts of York Council's organisational developments under her watch is to withold cash that should be returned to the payer if not spent - how positive is that ?
As for employee engagement, how many staff knew that she was on yet another public speaking event in the council's time ?
Here we are with job cuts and less having to do more, and the head honcho is leading by example, telling others how it should be done, and neglecting her own job 1
Like Alexander, Ms England is doing this not for York's benefit, she's doing it for her own self-serving political and career ends. Networking for her next job opportunity, which won't be long. She'll be gone before the 2015 election but might just delat her 'Grand Depart' till after the bike race, when even more of our money will be wasted !Rocking Horse

Delegate at today's West Midlands Employers conference at Villa Park where Kersten England gave her speech, tweeted as follows:-

john atkinson @tryweryn91 10h
York using Open Innovation as a way of addressing the city's issues backed by a £1m fund @Kersten1england #WMEConference

john atkinson @tryweryn91 10h
York council, wifi, cohabit with business and cvs, 3 desks per 5, its open 24-7, everyone can see #WMEConference @Kersten1england

I wonder if she told them that she had spent £600,000 making 5 yrs old James Street office open plan just to gain 4 workspaces ? Why couldn't they manage with '3 desks per 5' as at West Offices ? It's not as though they are swelling the workforce, as at West Offices they have surplus space.

Is the the sort of 'innovation' Kersten is referring to ? Sounds more like waste and profligacy.

Interesting that she tweeted after the conference that her speech was not about what it said in the WME flyer...

Suddenly it was about 'growth collab w localgov'. Does she have a bad memory ?

Delegate at today's West Midlands Employers conference at Villa Park where Kersten England gave her speech, tweeted as follows:-
john atkinson @tryweryn91 10h
York using Open Innovation as a way of addressing the city's issues backed by a £1m fund @Kersten1england #WMEConference
john atkinson @tryweryn91 10h
York council, wifi, cohabit with business and cvs, 3 desks per 5, its open 24-7, everyone can see #WMEConference @Kersten1england
I wonder if she told them that she had spent £600,000 making 5 yrs old James Street office open plan just to gain 4 workspaces ? Why couldn't they manage with '3 desks per 5' as at West Offices ? It's not as though they are swelling the workforce, as at West Offices they have surplus space.
Is the the sort of 'innovation' Kersten is referring to ? Sounds more like waste and profligacy.
Interesting that she tweeted after the conference that her speech was not about what it said in the WME flyer...
Kersten England @Kersten1england 7h
Start Yk w Greg C + Ld Heseltine on deals + infr investment then 2 Brum 2 share platform w JaguarLR talking growth collab w locgov in WMids.
Suddenly it was about 'growth collab w localgov'. Does she have a bad memory ?Rocking Horse

tonyfromitaly wrote:
I see the Reich minister of propaganda has struck in double quick time with a minus 87 and a minus 88. You sad person you might think you are immune to reproach for your twisting and conniving but then so did Joseph Goebles.
I recall he had a date with the hangman in the end.

You recall wrongly, he shot himself.

[quote][p][bold]tonyfromitaly[/bold] wrote:
I see the Reich minister of propaganda has struck in double quick time with a minus 87 and a minus 88. You sad person you might think you are immune to reproach for your twisting and conniving but then so did Joseph Goebles.
I recall he had a date with the hangman in the end.[/p][/quote]You recall wrongly, he shot himself.CaroleBaines

tonyfromitaly wrote: I see the Reich minister of propaganda has struck in double quick time with a minus 87 and a minus 88. You sad person you might think you are immune to reproach for your twisting and conniving but then so did Joseph Goebles. I recall he had a date with the hangman in the end.

You recall wrongly, he shot himself.

Correct.

It was infact Hermann Wilhelm Göring, who after being tried and found guilty at the Nuremberg military tribunals, was sentenced to hang, but, the night before he was to be hung, he too committed suicide, by taking a potassium cyanide capsule.

[quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]tonyfromitaly[/bold] wrote: I see the Reich minister of propaganda has struck in double quick time with a minus 87 and a minus 88. You sad person you might think you are immune to reproach for your twisting and conniving but then so did Joseph Goebles. I recall he had a date with the hangman in the end.[/p][/quote]You recall wrongly, he shot himself.[/p][/quote]Correct.
It was infact Hermann Wilhelm Göring, who after being tried and found guilty at the Nuremberg military tribunals, was sentenced to hang, but, the night before he was to be hung, he too committed suicide, by taking a potassium cyanide capsule.Rocking Horse